BDC / MIT framework — "investing in digital technologies drives revenue, but transformation management capabilities drive profits" (capability ≠ outcome)

Claim. BDC, citing the MIT digital-transformation model, distinguishes between technology investment (which drives revenue) and transformation-management capabilities — clear strategy, vision, training, continuous-improvement culture — which drive profit. Without the latter, technology investment has a harder time driving profits.

Quote.

"Investing in digital technologies drives revenue, but transformation management capabilities drive profits."

Source. BDC (bdc.ca), citing the MIT model, accessed 2026-06-21.

Confidence. Verified. The capability/outcome distinction is consensus across the digital-transformation literature; BDC's presentation is a direct restatement of the underlying MIT (Westerman / Bonnet / McAfee) framework.

Caveats. "Transformation management capabilities" is a fuzzy construct that resists clean measurement; the BDC-via-MIT framing names it without quantifying it.

Implication / use. The honest counter to "we have the data, therefore we have the edge." Capability ≠ outcome. The information edge requires the firm to change behaviour and have someone with authority to act on the flag. Anchors Rule: capability does not equal outcome — without transformation management, tech investment drives revenue but not profit.